Qantas overseas maintenance not up to scratch, audit says
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas overseas maintenance not up to scratch, audit says
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...3/s1877613.htm
An audit by Qantas has raised concerns about safety standards of an overseas maintenance contractor.
The auditors found a number of serious problems with work carried out by the Singapore Airlines Engineering Company.
They included screws left scattered on wings, cables not replaced and substandard repairs on floor panels.
Doug Cameron from the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union (AMWU) says it underlines union concerns about Qantas maintenance going offshore.
"I think this raises serious questions about the safety of the aircraft maintained overseas and it justifies everything we've been saying about Qantas outsourcing the aircraft and simply washing their hands of the process to overseas," he said.
Qantas's head of engineering, David Cox, has told the ABC radio's The World Today the work was not acceptable, but it has since been addressed.
"We've never said that suppliers never have a problem and that they're perfect, that would be ridiculous," he said.
"What we've said is, if there are issues, we'll go in we'll deal with them and we won't give up until they're dealt with and I think some of the quotes in there show very clearly the resolve with which we attacked that problem."
An audit by Qantas has raised concerns about safety standards of an overseas maintenance contractor.
The auditors found a number of serious problems with work carried out by the Singapore Airlines Engineering Company.
They included screws left scattered on wings, cables not replaced and substandard repairs on floor panels.
Doug Cameron from the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union (AMWU) says it underlines union concerns about Qantas maintenance going offshore.
"I think this raises serious questions about the safety of the aircraft maintained overseas and it justifies everything we've been saying about Qantas outsourcing the aircraft and simply washing their hands of the process to overseas," he said.
Qantas's head of engineering, David Cox, has told the ABC radio's The World Today the work was not acceptable, but it has since been addressed.
"We've never said that suppliers never have a problem and that they're perfect, that would be ridiculous," he said.
"What we've said is, if there are issues, we'll go in we'll deal with them and we won't give up until they're dealt with and I think some of the quotes in there show very clearly the resolve with which we attacked that problem."
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes we have addressed the issue we have gotten rid of the person that found the faults in the MRO,oh hang on a sec did we send a D check to Singapore,dam it was ment to go to Avalon when we shut down Sydney H.M.sorry about that chaps
Guest
Posts: n/a
Now Qantas are playing the "racist" card..... yeah that's right, engineering staff/unions are racist for pointing out the deficiencies at overseas MROs.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21422209-2,00.html
Nice one.... you are stooping lower and lower Mr Dixon/Cox. What next? Please try to come up with a credible argument next time.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21422209-2,00.html
Nice one.... you are stooping lower and lower Mr Dixon/Cox. What next? Please try to come up with a credible argument next time.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone keen to see an internal safety report written by you (maybe highlighting a screwup on your behalf) printed in a newspaper? Do you think you would feel happy about making another one if it happened?
The whole basis of these systems begins with open reporting of errors - ANYTHING that compromises the initiation of a report, brings down the whole quality system. Are we really going to continue to take the basis of the Australian Aviation Safety systems and parade them around, destroying the fundamental basis of its success with half truth and inuendo.
Rest assured - this is the most sinister and vindictive attack on aviation safety in this country - the damage that has already been done may take years to recover from - and this assumes we STOP IT NOW!
As to the ALAEA announcement about a confidential reporting run by them - just think, the next report you read may be yours when it suits the need and the agenda.....
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Harbour City
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a former Qantas apprentice and senior lame until last year i am shocked that the unions is attacking the maintanance record from Qantas. It must be the disgraceful actions of the unions to release the audit and it is a breach of policy that must be adressed. If the audits cant be kept secret then nobody will write them or report defects and the hole system will fall apart. The integrety needs to return and reports just read by the apropriate manager so they can fix problems and they will. I have met David Cox on a number of occassions and he would not lie and has always put the airline before himself. I warned that the new alaea will ruin the good working relatonship with Qantas and now it looks like i am right. 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its all about the bonus!
They shut down an Australian Heavy facility with all the bs figures they can conjure. It was not allowed to succeed, regardless of how well it was and could have performed. Avalon was never ready to fill the hole and still isn't. Yet they said it was to the public.
Yet you want these clowns protected. Read the articles and listen to the news. Its all about the current attitude of management toward maintenance. "it does not matter as long as it is cheap and we can pretend we didn't know and can spin a good cover story when found out.
See the whole picture.
This piece of infrastructure once gone will never be replaced. But when the dollar goes down and the overseas facilities fill up, they will still look after us really cheap won't they?
Our Country will be dumber, the managers will have their millions and some will be sitting there scratching their heads.
Yet you want these clowns protected. Read the articles and listen to the news. Its all about the current attitude of management toward maintenance. "it does not matter as long as it is cheap and we can pretend we didn't know and can spin a good cover story when found out.
See the whole picture.
This piece of infrastructure once gone will never be replaced. But when the dollar goes down and the overseas facilities fill up, they will still look after us really cheap won't they?
Our Country will be dumber, the managers will have their millions and some will be sitting there scratching their heads.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas has always maintained aircraft to a standard and not a price in the past.
I believe they are now trying to make a subtle shift to maintain aircraft to a price not a standard as do many other enterprises.
Qf did not have a lack of facilities until they closed down the Sydney Heavy maintenance facility.Brisbane could do all the A330 work and Sydney, Melbourne and Avalon could handle all the 737, 747 and 767 work.
I know for a fact the Australian Navy budget $xxx dollars for a refit for their ships and they simply do as much maintenance work as they can within that budget (as do many other enterprises). Whatever they can't afford, they just fix as it breaks. They maintain their equipment to price - not a standard.
This is simply not good enough for aviation. However I have the suspicion that QF management from non aviation backgrounds see what other industries to reduce cost and are simply copying them.
QF management engineered the lack of onshore facilities to enable the work to be done cheaper offshore. Even the on shore facilities they have created such as Avalon and Brisbane are suffering because they can't attract experienced people because they are so focused on price.
I have no proof but I can guarantee the work carried out offshore is done to a price not a standard. Oh please, you are niaeve in the extreme to think otherwise despite the fact that CASA delgates, QF LAMES, other hangers-on are present. (did they really change the oil filters or just polish the filter bowls??? 2 or 3 QF LAMES can't check everything!!)
As I no longer certify for aircraft as a LAME and I have probably flown twice in the last 5 years, I no longer have a vested interest but I see it as hugely disappointing to see what is happening.
I believe they are now trying to make a subtle shift to maintain aircraft to a price not a standard as do many other enterprises.
Qf did not have a lack of facilities until they closed down the Sydney Heavy maintenance facility.Brisbane could do all the A330 work and Sydney, Melbourne and Avalon could handle all the 737, 747 and 767 work.
I know for a fact the Australian Navy budget $xxx dollars for a refit for their ships and they simply do as much maintenance work as they can within that budget (as do many other enterprises). Whatever they can't afford, they just fix as it breaks. They maintain their equipment to price - not a standard.
This is simply not good enough for aviation. However I have the suspicion that QF management from non aviation backgrounds see what other industries to reduce cost and are simply copying them.
QF management engineered the lack of onshore facilities to enable the work to be done cheaper offshore. Even the on shore facilities they have created such as Avalon and Brisbane are suffering because they can't attract experienced people because they are so focused on price.
I have no proof but I can guarantee the work carried out offshore is done to a price not a standard. Oh please, you are niaeve in the extreme to think otherwise despite the fact that CASA delgates, QF LAMES, other hangers-on are present. (did they really change the oil filters or just polish the filter bowls??? 2 or 3 QF LAMES can't check everything!!)
As I no longer certify for aircraft as a LAME and I have probably flown twice in the last 5 years, I no longer have a vested interest but I see it as hugely disappointing to see what is happening.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas plane flies without oxygen
By Geoff Easdown
March 22, 2007 Article from: Herald-Sun
A QANTAS passenger jet flew from Manila to Australia without emergency oxygen because it had been sealed off by Philippines maintenance workers.
The fault was discovered only after the 300-seat A330 Airbus landed at Sydney airport.
Angry pilots and engineers have called for a Senate inquiry into maintenance policies at Qantas, and the airline has ordered an urgent internal investigation.
The plane, on a ferry flight after a major overhaul, was carrying a flight crew and possibly some Qantas staff.
A damaging audit report on poor maintenance of a 747-400 Jumbo in Singapore last year was also revealed this week.
The incidents add to concerns among airline staff and politicians that maintenance standards could fall if an $11.1 billion bid for the carrier succeeds.
A leaked maintenance report on the Airbus seen by the Herald Sun and dated March 11 says: "On investergation (sic) found crew oxy bottle shutoff valve in the closed position and lockwired."
The report notes the valve was opened to the flow position by engineering staff at Sydney's Mascot airport.
Angry pilots and maintenance engineers compared the problem with the situation Prime Minister John Howard confronted in a smoke-filled RAAF Hercules in Iraq at the weekend.
"If there had been smoke in the (Qantas) aircraft, the crew would have needed that oxygen," said Capt Mike Glynn, acting president of the Australian International Pilots Association and a qualified A330 pilot.
"This oxygen is meant to be provided to flight crew during an emergency."
Capt Glynn said if the problem was missed in a pre-flight check, it could have led to "potentially dire circumstances".
Steve Purvis, federal secretary of the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, said "that plane would have dived in the dirt in an emergency without oxygen in the cockpit".
David Cox, Qantas executive general manager, engineering, said a back-up oxygen bottle had been on the plane.
Both Capt Glynn and Mr Purvis said the oxygen incident and flaws in work carried out on a Boeing 747-400 by a Singapore contractor highlighted the need for a Senate inquiry into Qantas maintenance.
Mr Cox acknowledged that the A330 was flown to Australia with the oxygen valve wired shut.
He said the Airbus, registered VH-EBA, carried only the cockpit crew and "possibly several other staff" on the flight.
The plane had returned from Manila where Lufthansa Technik, an offshoot of Germany's international airline, had carried out a major C-check overhaul.
"No facility is perfect, every facility has problems," said Mr Cox, arguing that it was the diligence with which maintenance issues were managed that was what eventually counted.
He would not discuss how the problem occurred, noting that a "quality resolution was in play with Lufthansa Technik". Pressed again how the problem came about, Mr Cox replied: "I don't think that's appropriate for me to speculate.
"We are running an investigation with the provider. We will run it down to root cause.
"We will not give up if we are going to use that facility again until the specifics of that issue have been resolved."
Mr Cox said the leaked details involved confidential information from the Qantas audit system and it could become a criminal matter that the document was in someone else's hands.
The oxygen issue is the latest in a series of complaints airline staff have raised about contracting maintenance to low-cost overseas workshops.
A report in The Australian yesterday noted that a Qantas investigation had raised doubts over whether maintenance carried out on its planes overseas was meeting the airline's own standards or those of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
Mr Cox said of maintenance contracts: "If the standards are not up to our expectations we will go in and deal with that."
So David Cox tries to migtigate this, minimise this, by saying a "back-up oxygen bottle had been on the plane."
Well, David, mate, if there had been a depressurisation on the aircraft everyone would have DIED. Simple as that. The crew would have donned the oxygen masks as part of the deco procedure, in the expectation that oxygen would have flowed. Then they would have gone to sleep.
Oh and yes - best form of defence is attack, isn' it: "Mr Cox said the leaked details involved confidential information from the Qantas audit system and it could become a criminal matter that the document was in someone else's hands". Ah yes, shoot the messenger in true QF spirit. Well, perhaps the criminality really lies somewhere else, Mr Cox......
By Geoff Easdown
March 22, 2007 Article from: Herald-Sun
A QANTAS passenger jet flew from Manila to Australia without emergency oxygen because it had been sealed off by Philippines maintenance workers.
The fault was discovered only after the 300-seat A330 Airbus landed at Sydney airport.
Angry pilots and engineers have called for a Senate inquiry into maintenance policies at Qantas, and the airline has ordered an urgent internal investigation.
The plane, on a ferry flight after a major overhaul, was carrying a flight crew and possibly some Qantas staff.
A damaging audit report on poor maintenance of a 747-400 Jumbo in Singapore last year was also revealed this week.
The incidents add to concerns among airline staff and politicians that maintenance standards could fall if an $11.1 billion bid for the carrier succeeds.
A leaked maintenance report on the Airbus seen by the Herald Sun and dated March 11 says: "On investergation (sic) found crew oxy bottle shutoff valve in the closed position and lockwired."
The report notes the valve was opened to the flow position by engineering staff at Sydney's Mascot airport.
Angry pilots and maintenance engineers compared the problem with the situation Prime Minister John Howard confronted in a smoke-filled RAAF Hercules in Iraq at the weekend.
"If there had been smoke in the (Qantas) aircraft, the crew would have needed that oxygen," said Capt Mike Glynn, acting president of the Australian International Pilots Association and a qualified A330 pilot.
"This oxygen is meant to be provided to flight crew during an emergency."
Capt Glynn said if the problem was missed in a pre-flight check, it could have led to "potentially dire circumstances".
Steve Purvis, federal secretary of the Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association, said "that plane would have dived in the dirt in an emergency without oxygen in the cockpit".
David Cox, Qantas executive general manager, engineering, said a back-up oxygen bottle had been on the plane.
Both Capt Glynn and Mr Purvis said the oxygen incident and flaws in work carried out on a Boeing 747-400 by a Singapore contractor highlighted the need for a Senate inquiry into Qantas maintenance.
Mr Cox acknowledged that the A330 was flown to Australia with the oxygen valve wired shut.
He said the Airbus, registered VH-EBA, carried only the cockpit crew and "possibly several other staff" on the flight.
The plane had returned from Manila where Lufthansa Technik, an offshoot of Germany's international airline, had carried out a major C-check overhaul.
"No facility is perfect, every facility has problems," said Mr Cox, arguing that it was the diligence with which maintenance issues were managed that was what eventually counted.
He would not discuss how the problem occurred, noting that a "quality resolution was in play with Lufthansa Technik". Pressed again how the problem came about, Mr Cox replied: "I don't think that's appropriate for me to speculate.
"We are running an investigation with the provider. We will run it down to root cause.
"We will not give up if we are going to use that facility again until the specifics of that issue have been resolved."
Mr Cox said the leaked details involved confidential information from the Qantas audit system and it could become a criminal matter that the document was in someone else's hands.
The oxygen issue is the latest in a series of complaints airline staff have raised about contracting maintenance to low-cost overseas workshops.
A report in The Australian yesterday noted that a Qantas investigation had raised doubts over whether maintenance carried out on its planes overseas was meeting the airline's own standards or those of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
Mr Cox said of maintenance contracts: "If the standards are not up to our expectations we will go in and deal with that."
So David Cox tries to migtigate this, minimise this, by saying a "back-up oxygen bottle had been on the plane."
Well, David, mate, if there had been a depressurisation on the aircraft everyone would have DIED. Simple as that. The crew would have donned the oxygen masks as part of the deco procedure, in the expectation that oxygen would have flowed. Then they would have gone to sleep.
Oh and yes - best form of defence is attack, isn' it: "Mr Cox said the leaked details involved confidential information from the Qantas audit system and it could become a criminal matter that the document was in someone else's hands". Ah yes, shoot the messenger in true QF spirit. Well, perhaps the criminality really lies somewhere else, Mr Cox......
Last edited by Ron & Edna Johns; 21st Mar 2007 at 20:34.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Terrible ... but it also raises more questions. On other carriers I worked with a proper crew oxygen function check was required and carried out before every flight. How do Qantas crew preflight the cockpit oxygen system on the bus ?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SYDNEY
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Cox said the leaked details involved confidential information from the Qantas audit system and it could become a criminal matter that the document was in someone else's hands.
Their he goes again thinking Qantas is above any law,This is an issue for CASA which is a goverment department,which looks after the flying publics interest not Qantas 's.
Their he goes again thinking Qantas is above any law,This is an issue for CASA which is a goverment department,which looks after the flying publics interest not Qantas 's.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The system of maintenance
What is it about this point that is being missed. There are only so many layers of swiss cheese you can remove before the holes all line up. Remember this is what QF is famous for and derives its premium ticket price.
The ALAEA and AIPA and others are pointing out the fact when maintenance is done to a contract, that nothing else is looked for or maintained as long as all the boxes are signed. When carried out in Australia the training ratio is much higher, people work to Australian OH and S (another inefficiency!!!??? we must work to) and if it was broken it was fixed.
It is not an attack on individuals but the new management style, a CHEAP system introduced by people facing mega bonuses for said introduction.
What is it about this you want to protect.
The problem with QF is the now ignorant and poor management respect of a great system of maintenance.
Great work lets encourage 3rd world working conditions and standards. F your health and family and anything else you don't need to look after Its all about CHEAP.
Which trailer park do you own.
The ALAEA and AIPA and others are pointing out the fact when maintenance is done to a contract, that nothing else is looked for or maintained as long as all the boxes are signed. When carried out in Australia the training ratio is much higher, people work to Australian OH and S (another inefficiency!!!??? we must work to) and if it was broken it was fixed.
It is not an attack on individuals but the new management style, a CHEAP system introduced by people facing mega bonuses for said introduction.
What is it about this you want to protect.
The problem with QF is the now ignorant and poor management respect of a great system of maintenance.
Great work lets encourage 3rd world working conditions and standards. F your health and family and anything else you don't need to look after Its all about CHEAP.
Which trailer park do you own.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Endor
Age: 83
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IN my humble opinion, the game that management is introducing in maintenance is the same one in place in the worlds largest corporation, where I had the misfortune to work before joining an airline many years ago.
I had a set maintenance budget. I had an entire oil terminal to maintain. I had twelve staff. I had over twelve inches thick of manuals of company maintenance standards that I had to work to covering every aspect of my work.
I analysed the requirements and quickly realised that there was no way I could comply with company standards with the staff and budget available. Something had to give. I communicated this to my bosses boss and got the"'come to Jesus" lecture.
"Did I want to be a good corporate employee on the lowest rung of what could be a stellar management career with the worlds largest and richest energy company?". "Did I understand that in six months I would receive my bonus?" "Did I understand that in eighteen months time I would be posted to the luxurious Head Office, with a very major pay increment and from thence overseas in a further two years?" "Or did I want to be a whining troublemaker with no future?".
Most managers, with wife and kids and mortgage, had made the choice to do what they could and hope and pray nothing happened while they were in charge, leaving the mess to the next guy.
A short term bonus culture encourages such thinking. The people that destroyed Ansett were long gone before the damage they had wrought became apparent.
I do not believe that anyone making decisions on aircraft maintenance and overhaul should be paid a bonus.
I had a set maintenance budget. I had an entire oil terminal to maintain. I had twelve staff. I had over twelve inches thick of manuals of company maintenance standards that I had to work to covering every aspect of my work.
I analysed the requirements and quickly realised that there was no way I could comply with company standards with the staff and budget available. Something had to give. I communicated this to my bosses boss and got the"'come to Jesus" lecture.
"Did I want to be a good corporate employee on the lowest rung of what could be a stellar management career with the worlds largest and richest energy company?". "Did I understand that in six months I would receive my bonus?" "Did I understand that in eighteen months time I would be posted to the luxurious Head Office, with a very major pay increment and from thence overseas in a further two years?" "Or did I want to be a whining troublemaker with no future?".
Most managers, with wife and kids and mortgage, had made the choice to do what they could and hope and pray nothing happened while they were in charge, leaving the mess to the next guy.
A short term bonus culture encourages such thinking. The people that destroyed Ansett were long gone before the damage they had wrought became apparent.
I do not believe that anyone making decisions on aircraft maintenance and overhaul should be paid a bonus.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Terrible ... but it also raises more questions. On other carriers I worked with a proper crew oxygen function check was required and carried out before every flight. How do Qantas crew preflight the cockpit oxygen system on the bus ?
An oxygen test preflight would be standard procedure on any aircraft with a crew supply system. The problem is that even with valve turned off, there can be enough residual pressure to "pass" the test once or twice, the next time though, you'd be gasping!
Mr Cox should be made to clarify his outrageous statement about back-up supply. A person in such a position should not be able to get away with such comments!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: australia
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not believe that anyone making decisions on aircraft maintenance and overhaul should be paid a bonus.
if the job took 25 hrs and you did it in 20 then you got 5 hrs bonus.they scrapped it because people COVERED UP their mistakes and tried to fool quailty assurance people.
cheap
quality
fast
pick two from the above
because in maintenance you cant have all three
How do Qantas crew preflight the cockpit oxygen system on the bus ?
The crew may not have been QF as EBA is a A332 given to Jetstar.
Whoever it was needs to look at the airspace design south of manilla as well.
A bit tricky with the co ord with Ujung!
Also no need to talk to Mactan approach when climbing to f410!!!!
A bit tricky with the co ord with Ujung!
Also no need to talk to Mactan approach when climbing to f410!!!!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: OZ
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not on the Bus but on Boeing aircraft we monitor system pressure during the check. If the valve is closed then the indicated pressure should drop rapidly, whereas, if the valve is open then the pressure should not change.
Its quite feasable that the crew did thier test in MNL all looked good but when the crew in SYD did their test the pressure dropped to the trigger point and the rest is history.
One good thing came out of this.
We know EBA oxy system does NOT leak
